Flying Yangban

The Yangban's Mailbag: The world is one and its competitive. There's no hiding from it.

Reaching into my mail bag, I've gotten a couple of interesting comments. One brings up some really interesting stuff (at least in my mind) that I want to talk about. But first this:

Give props and you shall receive props
I got this comment from Paul Eckert at Reuters after I had complimented the work of some of their photographers' work during the FTA riots last week:

I passed on your compliments to our photographers at Reuters Seoul. They are both soft-spoken and mild-mannered yet courageous pros who always find themselves in the thick of things and have great crowd sense. Kim Kyung-hoon came in bandaged today after taking a pelting by stones on his forearm. Our TV crew had the windows of its car smashed out in the melee. Thanks for mentioning them by name.

I like using pictures when I can. It adds color to my admittedly plain-looking blog and like they say; a picture's worth a thousand words. I try to credit my pics when I can. It's the least I can do since I'm not able to pay for them (this being a non-commercial blog and all).

This also confirms what I had long suspected: That reporters and producers regularly check out the Korean Bloggerista. It makes sense since many of us are always looking for the latest news or a new angle on current events. It would be silly for people in the media not to take advantage. That is especially true for Korean-literate bloggers like The Marmot and Oranckay.

************************************************************************

There is competition between nations. If you don't compete, you die.

Now lets move on to the letter that inspired the title of this post. My most commented on post by far was a piece I did on oriental romanticism in the movie "The Last Samurai" last month. That included an exchange of several comments between myself and "NIX." The pertinent part here was at the end of his last comment:

(A)bout the feudal system, there are many people around the world that are content with their way of life, even if it may seem backwards to some. And Americans cannot tell them that if you do not adopt Western ways then they are backwards. Isn't it more important to be satisfied than to "progress"? Only countries that are not "happy" feel the need to conquer other civilizations, to pillage and to control.

Not everything in life should be a competition. Sometimes "primitive" is good.

As my output on this blog shows, I'm one of the laziest people on God's Good Earth. I would love to live in a world without competition. However, that is just not possible for people. Nor is it possible for nations here is why:

As Jared Diamond points out in his book Guns, Germs and Steel, the Eurasian land mass between 25 and 55 degrees north has been prime real estate for human activities over the last 8,000 years or so. Diamond explains that due to climate and geography, those areas supported more domestic plant and animal species (which could support human advancement) than any others. It is not an accident that most of the great empires in history (China, Persia, Rome, among others) have risen from those parts of Eurasia.

Now, Diamond's book is good but it only takes us as far as agricultural and pastoral-based systems. A perfect companion book is Paul Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. Kennedy's book picks up just as Europe is breaking into the early industrial period. In his opening chapter, Kennedy surmises that it was the competition between rival states in Europe that allowed them to surpass both China and the Ottoman Empire. The later two had a monopoly of power in their respective areas. This led to a comparative stagnation in development when those two empires turned inward while Europe's power grew with each new leap in technology. This link has passages from Kennedy's book relating to China.

(Going to Yangban thinking here.) So we have some people who sit on prime real estate and others who are relegated to the periphery. If your nation happens to hold some of this prime land, I guarantee you, someone else will try to take it. That is why most civilizations grew and expanded from the same latitudinal belt in Eurasia and why they had to almost continuously fight to keep control of that land.

Looking at China, we see some of the most fertile land in the world. It supported huge populations and was relatively easy to transverse. This lent itself to the creation of large empires, one of which would eventually become China. Now, once your tribe (nation, empire) had control of those plains, the other tribes were stuck in a peripheral position: There was desert and scrubland to the north (Mongols and Jurchens), Rocky islands and a peninsula to the east (Koreans and Japanese), Jungles to the south (Vietnamese, Khmer among others), and mountains in the west (Tibet and Turkish tribes). So for most of history, controlling China made you the cat-daddy of East Asia and there was little that any of the other nations could do about it.

Once you've got that prime real estate, you have to hold it and believe me, someone else will want to take it. Because it had the power that comes from having the most productive land, few invasions of China were successful. Some of the more notable exceptions being the Mongolians in the 13th century and the Manchus (Jurchens) in the 17th century. Of course, the Japanese failed dismally (Great link) in their attempt in 1592 (thanks in part to ubber stud Lee Sun-Shin).

On the other hand, even with its great resources China didn't have enough power to control all of Asia. While it had the power to take out any one of its neighbors, it could not do so without making itself vulnerable to others. Furthermore, maintaining control of less productive areas far from China's base would have been a prohibitively large drain on its resources. So even China had limits on how much territory it could control.

But having the best land in Asia gave China another advantage. Because its land could support large populations, there rose in China huge numbers of "non-productive" classes; artisans, scholars, scientists and bureaucrats. These groups established and maintained China's technological and cultural superiority over its neighbors for most of the last 2500 years or so. That cultural superiority helped maintain China's position as the "Middle Country" as many other nations borrowed heavily from China and venerated Chinese institutions (none more so than the Koreans).

Indeed, after the few times China was conquered, the conquerors adopted Chinese ways rather than the other way around. That was a similar process as what happened when Rome conquered Greece and (to some extent) when the Crusaders clashed with Arab civilization.

So what happened to make China fall behind? To oversimplify things (and that is what the Yangban does best), China got lazy and there was no other kid on the block strong enough to call them out on it. Sure, the Manchus gave China a bit of a kick, but they quickly sat on the laurels that the Ming were keeping warm for them. If someone had done that in Europe the Hapsburgs or the Bourbons would have been on them like white on rice.

What the industrial revolution did was allow more peripheral nations (such as Britain and Japan) to develop power without having a large agricultural base. By the time the Chinese realized that they needed to get with the program it was too late and they were subjected to over a hundred years of European (chiefly British) and Japanese dominance.

That industrial-based rise in power also allowed European nations to compete (and win) against nations in every corner of the world. Contrary to popular thought, Europeans didn't invent imperialism, they just globalized it.

So the history shows this: You snooze, you lose. Less "competitive" societies will always fall to more dynamic societies. Going back to Japan, that means 19th century Japan had to either adapt or be overtaken. That's a simple choice if you ask me.

(OK, this post is already too long and I haven't even gotten to America yet. I guess I'll save that for another post.)

Rioting is as Korean as Kimchi (the Chosun era practice of Sok Chon and modern Korean riots)

As I posted yesterday, there was another big riot in Seoul yesterday. The main issue that the rioters were concerned about was a free trade agreement with Chile. Well, the vote was delayed so we will have at least one more chance to catch these farmer Chos in action.

Now, several bloggers out their have strong opinions on rioting here. The Infidel at Kamelian X-Rays had this to say:

For those unfamiliar with the insular nature of South Korea, and enslaved to exotic notions of oriental wisdom, as a foreigner, South Korea is not a society, so much as a family. I know John Locke destroyed the arguments for patriarchy in the First and Second Treatises on Government, but in South Korea, family metaphors are right on the money. There is no difference between public and private, and the rulers' right to commit violence allows the children to respond in kind. I've never met people so inured to violence, physically or psychologically (and both my parents were abused children), in all my travel, nor so many people prepared to jump at the chance to respond with violence for any perceived infraction.

I am still waiting for my chance to disagree with the Infidel because he is pretty much on the money here.

The simple fact is that these riots are not a sign that there is some problem in Korea. They are just as much a part of Korean culture as kimchi, soju and sad sad movies. As I said about the labor union riots in November of last year:

There is nothing spontaneous about a Korean riot. Everyone knew there was going to be a riot and prepared accordingly.

These riots have a ritualistic quality. There are certain roles that everyone plays and certain rules that everyone follows. They are battles, but they are ritualistic battles like the flower wars of the Aztecs.

The farmers didn't attack the riot police because they couldn't get to the National Assembly building. The police-kids were the targets from the beginning.

Take another look at the video of the rioting (click on the link that starts "여의도는..."). You won't see some of the things that most westerners expect to see in a riot. There are no plastic hand cuffs to detain people with. There are no plastic bullets that could break a crowd up. In fact, the goal of the riot police is not to stop the riot and arrest the protesters. The goal of the riot police is to go out and do battle with them. As you look at the video footage, you'll see that the two sides take turns attacking the each other's lines and then falling back.

Also, take a look at the overturned, burning cars. What? There aren't any? That's right, there aren't. In fact, you'll see that both sides fight their way around them. This is not blind rage in action. This is a social role being played out. Since the owners of the cars and the shops in the area are not in the battle, both the police and the rioters usually try to avoid damage to them. Of course, this is not always the case and several shops were damaged in the November riots. But the point stands that these riots were not a case of people going out of control.

In fact, going into battle because of a perceived wrong is an old Korean tradition. Check out this article on Sok Chon from the Korea Times. Here is a sample:

The participants were generally the young men of two different villages, or families and their friends that had suffered some wrong from their opponents. Other times the battles were between two guilds that had decided to use the Sok Chon as a way of settling their differences _ these battles usually involved several hundred men and were particularly brutal.

The Korean government looked upon these "games" as a means of promoting martial spirit and allowing the people to let off some excess steam. Policemen were present, but they were not there to prevent the fights but to keep the crowds from getting caught up in the battle. Soldiers also witnessed the event, but they were prohibited from taking part, unless they were on their off-duty time, and then they often participated, sans the uniform, with violent glee.

The two teams advanced towards each other from opposite directions, their approach heralded by the intense taunting and cheering of their spectators. The combatants were armed with stones that had been polished and rounded by boys, iron and wooden cudgels, armor of twisted straw, wooden shields, and leather caps for helms. The stone throwers stood in the front rank while the cudgel wielders formed the second rank.

Calmness fell upon the land as the two leaders, a short distance ahead of their "soldiers," glared at one another and shouted taunts, challenging the other to prove himself a man. Suddenly one of the leaders shouted a battle cry and was answered by a rain of stones, and the two sides raced across the vacant expanse towards each other.

So what we have in these riots is basically a democratization of Sok Chon with people who think that they have been wronged by the government going into battle with agents of the government.

Usually, both sides play by the unwritten rules and there are mostly minor injuries. I'm not saying that rioting is OK, just that it is not as bad as it seems to us outsiders.

BTW, my last pic from yesterday's post showed farmer Cho pushing a burning cart towards the police. Well, this pic from the Chosun Ilbo shows that he made it.

I guess he was the little farmer that could. You go Cho!

Hanchongnyon kiddies take note: THIS is how to riot

(NOTE: There is another post about the big riots at Incestuous Amplification. It has a couple of good pics and this link to Ohmynews coverage of the riots. Just click on the first TV graphic at Ohmynews to see videos of the riots. And be sure to check out the stuff at IA.)

*************************************

At 11:00 AM today, about 900-1,500 anti-Iraq protesters held a rally in front of the National Assmebly building. Now, in Korea you can get a thousand or two people to show up to protest almost anything. So this might be a sign that the anti-Iraq protest movement is losing steam.

On the other hand, about 20,000 angry farmers came to Yoido (the island in the middle of the Han river where the National Assembly building is located) later to protest against a free trade agreement with Chile and promptly started to dance with the riot police. My girlfriend (who is talking classes on another part of the island) called me and said that I might want to come up and check things out. She said that the farmers and riot policemen were pretty friendly as they went in and came out of a nearby public restroom together.

But I knew better. It doesn't matter how folks are acting at 1:00. By 4:00 they'll be bashing each other over the head and I certainly wouldn't want to be the white boy caught in the middle of that. That is especially true of farmer protests. When those guys riot, its like they're strung out on PCP or something: They don't stop until someone is bleeding.

So I missed my chance to get some exclusive coverage of the riot. That's OK: I'll just yank some pics from Lee Jae-Won at Reuters (NOTE: If I ever make money from this blog I'll send some to Mr Lee) (NOTE 2: Props to Lee. He took some killer pics).

OK, here we go:

Here they come.

"Yeah, you better get that sh*t outta here!"

"Wait a minute. This isn't right."

"Run away! Run away!

"Plan A didn't work out so well. I think I'll just hide behind the bus and throw stuff."

"Man the ramparts!" This pic reminds me of the Battle of Helms Deep in the Two Towers. The riot police often use their buses as barriers.

"That's all you got?"

Now, this is just a bad idea.

A better idea. They have pikes! Remember kiddies, a good rioter comes prepared for anything.

I have to admit that I usually have more sympathy for the riot police kids in these situations. All they want to do is hang out around their bus, studying and eating ramyeon until their two-years are up. On the other hand, their job is usually a lot easier than the poor kids who have to patrol the DMZ all winter.

UPDATE: This pic from the Korea Times shows that the farmers took the fight well into the evening.

Not to be outdone, Kim Kyung-Hoon of Reuters took this pic of a rioter pushing a burning cart towards the police. Another bad idea.

It's 10:30 now. They might still be going at it.

(UPDATE: It's 11:20. Lady Yangban was getting out of class on another part of the island late this afternoon. She said that she saw smoke and flames and that a helecopter flew over her.) I hope she will post something on it at her blog tomorrow.

Hey! I've been published!

The Big Hominid isn't the only published writer out there in Korean Bloggerland.

I've co-written my first book and it's not on politics. I and another instructor got together to make a picture-based English conversation study book (we are listed in English section at Nexus Publishers).

Frankly, we wrote three whole books and the final product is very different than what we started out making. I had been hoping to apply what I have learned in five years of teaching English (without credentials, if you must know) to making the kind of book I wish I had as a supplemental text book. But, after working with our publisher and doing several rewrites, it evolved into a self-study book.

I hope we sell enough for a second printing for two reasons: First, I found a few printing mistakes that I would like to have corrected for a second run (but, uh, that doesn't mean that it isn't already a fine book and well worth the 15,000 won price). Second, the artist who drew the pictures gets the bulk of the royalties on the first run and we won't see any money unless they make at least two printings.

So help the Yangban out; tell any Korean friends you know to buy my book (see pic for name).

South Korea, The South and "Han"

Here are some quotes from a recent Washington Post Article:

There's so much to get wrong here, and so many people who feel they've been done wrong.

Or:

"No one can comfortably dismiss the past [there]," says Ferris. "It lives in a vivid and haunting way in the present." A sense of pride and grievance is always close by, just underneath, linked together...

Or:

A native finds it easier to access these whorls of culture and history, pride and grievance, which are so complicated, suggests Ferris. "For them, it's almost instinctual. You begin by greeting and respecting the elders. You do not sit down until you are offered a seat. You do not begin speaking about a subject until you are comfortable,"

There article ends on this hopeful note:

"We are famous for having the burden of the past, but more and more we are thinking about the future. The past interferes in evoking old grievances, but the sense that the future is going to be better has never been stronger than it is today. Somebody who understands that is going to be able to tap into a lot of energy and hope."

Is the article about Korea?

No, it is about the American South.

As The Marmot recalled in a post back in December, I once told him about a similar feel that I had with Koreans and Southerners. His sarcastic reply was something along the lines of "Yeah right, I've heard of those Southern Confucians." I can understand the sentiment and I certainly would not want to take the comparison between the American South and Korea too far.

But....

I often feel that there is a kind of connection between Southerners and Koreans on an emotional level. Like Koreans, Southerners combine a vereration of our past with a sense of collective loss. That combination creates a kind of resentment against others, especially outsiders who seem to think that they are better than us. This makes both of us resentful towards "Yankees."

Another aspect is an uneasy feeling that our historical loss was based, at least in part, by our own failings. For Southerners, it was our adherence to an outdated agrarian system and (for the upper classes) dependence on slave labor (Southern blacks, who descended from those slaves often feel an even greater burden). For Koreans it was backwards thinking and isolationism in the late 19th century that made them vulnerable to Japanese occupation. Of course, neither would admit as much unless you catch them in an unguarded moment.

So, like many Koreans, many Southerners carry a collective burden of anger, loss, a feeling of inferiority and a (often undefined) desire for revenge.

In short, Southerners have Han (Note: only the middle of the first page is relevant).

BTW, you can read all of the Post piece here.